Literature DB >> 34177420

Relationship of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic with Blood Groups.

Didar Yanardag Acik1, Mehmet Bankir1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV attaches to human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor with the spike protein and infects cells. It can play a direct role in infection by acting as a receptor and/or co-receptor for blood group antigens, microorganisms, parasites, and viruses.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the blood group distribution of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to hospital and that of healthy donors.
METHODS: A total of 823 patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test and clinical symptoms were included in the study. The results were compared with the normal blood group distribution in the region.
RESULTS: While the prevalence of COVID-19 in the A, B, and AB blood groups was higher than that in the healthy blood donors, it was lower in the O blood group (p = 0.009). The distribution of demographic and clinical characteristics based on blood groups did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSION: Our results are in agreement with other studies suggesting that blood group O individuals are somewhat more resistant to clinically overt infection with SARS-CoV-2 than other blood groups. However, this tendency is not sufficiently established to allow special prophylaxis recommendations for non-O individuals.
Copyright © 2021 by S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blood group O; Blood group distribution; SARS-CoV infection

Year:  2021        PMID: 34177420      PMCID: PMC8089448          DOI: 10.1159/000515609

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transfus Med Hemother        ISSN: 1660-3796            Impact factor:   3.747


Introduction

On March 11, 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (CO­VID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organisation (WHO) [1]. Evidence obtained from phylogenetic analysis shows that SARS-CoV-2, which belongs to the Betacoronavirus genus, can infect humans, bats, and wild animals [2]. SARS-CoV attaches to the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor with the spike protein and infects cells [3, 4]. COVID-19 spread rapidly around the world. There is a poor prognosis observed in the elderly, which is most commonly associated with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and immunosuppression [1, 5]. The relationship of infectious agents with human blood groups was investigated previously [6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14]. It has been indicated that the blood group antigens found in erythrocytes and other tissues interact with microorganisms such as bacteria, viruses, parasites, and fungi. Differences in blood group antigen expression can increase or decrease host susceptibility to many infections. This can play a direct role in infection by acting as a receptor and/or coreceptor for blood group antigens, microorganisms, parasites, and viruses [6, 7]. ABO antibodies can also be considered as part of the innate immune system against some bacterial pathogens and enveloped viruses carrying ABO-active antigens [8]. Helicobacter pylori [9], Vibrio cholerae [10, 11], hepatitis C virus [12], human immunodeficiency virus [13], and SARS [8, 14, 15] are some of the infectious agents that have been shown to be associated with human blood groups. Clinical studies have also been conducted examining the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and blood groups [16, 17, 18, 19]. However, more studies will be useful for comparing results and to understanding whether findings differ in different populations because the frequency of blood groups is variable between populations [20]. In this study, we aimed to compare blood group distribution in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who presented to our hospital with an indication for hospitalization and healthy donors from the same region. A distinctive feature of the Çukurova region is that haemoglobinopathies are endemic in this area [21, 22]. Investigating the relationship between blood groups and SARS-CoV-2 infection is important in this region because the human population living here has been determined by malaria infection throughout history.

Material and Methods

A total of 823 patients followed up at our hospital with a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 RNA between 25 March and 21 December 2020 were included in this study. The Bio-Speedy® (Bioexen, Istanbul, Turkey) nucleic acid isolation kit was used for nucleic acid isolation from respiratory tract (nasopharyngeal swab) samples obtained from the patients. Reverse transcription (RT) and quantitative RT-qPCR procedures were performed with QuantStudio Real-Time PCR Systems (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) using the Bio-Speedy® COVID-19 RT-qPCR detection kit, which was developed to detect the Wuhan CoV RdRP-gene region according to the protocol proposed by the WHO [23]. Molecular analysis results were interpreted as SARS-CoV-2-positive if Wuhan RdRP was positive, and SARS-CoV-2-negative if Wuhan RdRP was negative. The medical records of the patients were retrospectively reviewed. Patients' age, sex, white blood cell (WBC), neutrophil, and lymphocyte counts, comorbidities, intubation and intensive care needs, and hospitalization duration were obtained from the medical records. To make the laboratory values of the patient independent from the effects of the drugs, their values at the time of first admission to the hospital were recorded. The clinical results were determined based on the hospitalization duration, the need for intubation and intensive care, and death. Comorbid diseases came under the following headings. Coronary artery disease, hypertension, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral artery disease were classified as “cardiovascular disease,” and asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as “respiratory system diseases.” Cancer patients were not divided according to their types, and they were recorded as a general title. Less common comorbid diseases were classified as “others.” In the study by Yildiz [24], the blood type distribution in Çukurova region was determined. This study was conducted with healthy blood donors. In this study, the blood groups of 136,038 individuals were determined as A in 38.90%, O in 37.10%, B in 17.00%, and AB in 6.90%. Of the same individuals, 89.90% were Rh(+) and 10.10% were Rh(−). The results of this study were compared with those of our study in terms of blood group distribution.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical evaluation was conducted using SPSS for Windows 20 (IBM SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Normality of the distribution of data was evaluated by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Numerical variables with normal distribution are given as mean ± SD and numerical variables without normal distribution as median (interquartile range, 25th–75th percentiles). Categorical variables are indicated as numbers and percentages. The χ2 and Fisher exact tests were used to compare categorical data. The Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test was used for the comparison of numerical variables between 2 groups according to the normality of distribution. Based on the normality of distribution, analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for the comparison of numerical variables among blood group ABO patients. The findings associated with the prognosis were analyzed using the Cox regression analysis. The survival chart was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The study population consisted of 823 patients (aged 18–97 years; 470 men [57.1%] and 353 women [42.9%]). Of the patients, 351 (42.6%) had blood group A, 153 (18.6%) had group B, 250 (30.4%) had group O, and 69 (8.4%) had group AB; 86 (10.4%) patients were Rh–. The distribution of blood groups in our region is shown in Figure 1. Accordingly, while A, B, and AB blood groups were seen more frequently in COVID-19 cases than in the healthy blood donors, the incidence of COVID-19 was lower in the O blood group than in healthy blood donors (p = 0.009). Among all the patients, 510 (62%) had a comorbidity.
Fig. 1

ABO blood group prevalence in COVID-19 cases.

The demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 are shown in Table 1. Distributions of demographic and clinical characteristics did not differ significantly according to blood group. In intubated versus non-intubated patients, male sex ratio (63.4 vs. 45.5%; p = 0.019), mean age (67.0 ± 13.5 vs. 55.2 ± 17.1; p < 0.001), and comorbidity ratio (80.3 vs. 54.5%; p < 0.001) as well as mortality rate (89.9 vs. 1.5%; p < 0.001) were found to be higher. The median WBC (13.2 vs. 7.6; p < 0.001) and neutrophil (11.8 vs. 5.2; p < 0.001) counts were higher and lymphocyte count (0.5 vs. 1.3; p < 0.001) lower in intubated patients than in non-intubated patients (Table 2). The multivariable Cox regression model included age, comorbid diseases, admission to the intensive care unit, intubation status as well as WBC, neutrophil, and lymphocyte counts, all of which were found to be associated with mortality; older age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02; p = 0.038), T2DM (HR 1.72; p = 0.022), T2DM and cardiovascular disease (HR 1.64; p = 0.029), being intubated (HR 22.84; p < 0.001), and a higher neutrophil count (HR 1.02; p = 0.020) were independent predictors for mortality. There was no significant correlation between blood groups (Fig. 2) and other demographic characteristics and other clinical findings and mortality (Table 3).
Table 1

Demographic characteristics and clinical findings according to blood groups

VariablesN = 823ABO group
p value
A (n = 351)B (n = 153)AB (n = 69)0 (n = 250)
Sex
 Female353 (42.9)137 (39.0)66 (43. 1)31 (44.9)119 (47.6)0.211
 Male470 (57.1)214 (61.0)87 (56.9)38 (55.1)131 (52.4)
Age, years (mean ± SD)58.6±17.058.8±16.860.0±18.357.3±15.858.0±16.70.639
Comorbidity
 No313 (38.0)133 (37.9)58 (37.9)21 (30.4)101 (40.4)0.515
 Yes510 (62.0)218 (62.1)95 (62.1)48 (69.6)149 (59.6)
  CVD179 (21.7)82 (23.4)37 (24.2)13 (18.8)47 (18.8)0.701
  RSD28 (3.4)10 (2.8)6 (3.9)5 (7.2)7 (2.8)
  DM81 (9.8)35 (10.0)14 (9.2)6 (8.7)26 (10.4)
  Psychosis7 (0.9)1 (0.3)1 (0.7)2 (2.9)3 (1.2)
  Cancer17 (2.1)6 (1.7)3 (2.0)3 (4.3)5 (2.0)
  RSD, CVD8 (1.0)2 (0.6)1 (0.7)5 (2.0)
  DM, CVD141 (17.1)63 (17.9)25 (16.3)15 (21.7)38 (15.2)
  DM, CVD, RSD12 (1.5)5 (1.4)2 (1.3)5 (2.0)
 Other37 (4.5)14 (4.0)6 (3.9)4 (5.8)13 (5.2)
Rh-positive737 (89.6)308 (87.7)138 (90.2)68 (98.6)223 (89.2)0.063
Rh-negative86 (10.4)43 (12.3)15 (9.8)1 (1.4)27 (10.8)
ICU admission
 No425 (51.6)177 (50.4)76 (49.7)41 (59.4)131 (52.4)0.537
 Yes398 (48.4)174 (49.6)77 (50.3)28 (40.6)119 (47.6)
Intubated
 No585 (71.1)251 (71.5)105 (68.6)53 (76.8)176 (70.4)0.651
 Yes238 (28.9)100 (28.5)48 (31.4)16 (23.2)74 (29.6)
Prognosis
 Alive600 (72.9)258 (73.5)108 (70.6)55 (79.7)179 (71.6)0.510
 Exitus223 (27.1)93 (26.5)45 (29.4)14 (20.3)71 (28.4)
Follow-up period, days WBC, ×103/µL9 (6–15)9 (6–15)9 (6–15)8 (5–12)9 (6–14)0.569
8.5 (6.2–12)8.4 (6.2–11.5)8.2 (6.2–11.8)8 (5.5–11.2)8.8 (6.5–12.5)0.380
NEU, ×103/µL6.35 (4.1–10.4)6.1 (4.2–10.1)5.9 (3.9–9.9)5.3 (3.5–9.7)7.1 (4.3–11)0.144
LY, ×103/µL1 (0.6–1.6)1.1 (0.6–1.6)1.1 (0.5–1.7)1.2 (0.6–1.8)1 (0.5–1.5)0.500

Numerical variables without normal distribution are given as median (IQR, 25th–75th percentile). Categorical variables are given as n (%). CVD, cardiovascular disease; RSD, respiratory system diseases; DM, diabetes mellitus; ICU, intensive care unit; WBC, white blood cell; NEU, neutrophil; LY, lymphocyte.

Table 2

Demographic characteristics and clinical findings according to intubation status

VariablesIntubated
p value
yes (n = 238)no (n = 585)
Sex
 Female87 (36.6)266 (45.5)0.019*
 Male151 (63.4)319 (54.5)
Age, years (mean ± SD)67.0±13.555.2±17.1<0.001*
Comorbidity
 No47 (19.7)266 (45.5)<0.001*
 Yes191 (80.3)319 (54.5)
  CVD61 (25.6)118 (20.2)<0.001*
  RSD7 (2.9)21 (3.6)
  DM37 (15.5)44 (7.5)
  Psychosis6 (2.5)1 (0.2)
  Cancer10 (4.2)7 (1.2)
  RSD, CVD5 (2.1)3 (0.5)
  DM, CVD45 (18.9)96 (16.4)
  DM, CVD, RSD4 (1.7)8 (1.4)
  Other16 (6.7)21 (3.6)
ABO group
 A100 (42.0)251 (42.9)0.651
 B48 (20.2)105 (17.9)
 AB16 (6.7)53 (9.1)
 O74 (31.1)176 (30.1)
Rh-positive212 (89.1)525 (89.7)0.776
Rh-negative26 (10.9)60 (10.3)
ICU admission
 No1 (0.4)424 (72.5)<0.001*
 Yes237 (99.6)161 (27.5)
Prognosis
 Alive24 (10.1)576 (98.5)<0.001*
 Exitus214 (89.9)9 (1.5)
Follow-up period, days13 (7–21)8 (6–13)<0.001*
WBC, ×103/µL13.2 (8.9–18.7)7.6 (6–10.2)<0.001*
NEU, ×103/µL11.8 (7.3–17.1)5.2 (3.7–8.0)<0.001*
LY, ×103/µL0.5 (0.2–0.8)1.3 (0.8–1.8)<0.001*

Numerical variables without normal distribution are given as median (IQR, 25th–75th percentiles). Categorical variables are given as n (%). The asterisks show statistical significance. CVD, cardiovascular disease; RSD, respiratory system diseases; DM, diabetes mellitus; ICU, intensive care unit; WBC, white blood cell; NEU, neutrophil; LY, lymphocyte.

Fig. 2

Mortality risk by blood group.

Table 3

Factors associated with prognosis

VariablesPrognosis
Univariable
Multivariable
alive (n = 600)exitus (n = 223)HR95% CIp valueHR95% CIp value
Sex
 Female272 (45.3)81 (36.3)ref.ref.
 Male328 (54.7)142 (63.7)1.250.95–1.650.105
Age, years (mean ± SD)55.2±1767.8±13.21.031.02–1.04<0.001*1.021.01–1.030.038*
Comorbidity
 No272 (45.3)41 (18.4)ref.ref.
 CVD120 (20.0)59 (26.5)2.001.34–2.980.001*1.300.85–1.990.225
 RSD21 (3.5)7 (3.1)1.450.65–3.250.3611.290.58–2.900.535
 DM47 (7.8)34 (15.2)2.911.84–4.60<0.001*1.721.08–2.750.022*
 Psychosis1 (.2)6 (2.7)2.160.89–5.240.0880.790.32–1.930.605
 Cancer6 (1.0)11 (4.9)2.701.38–5.270.004*1.730.85–3.480.130
 RSD, CVD3 (.5)5 (2.2)7.172.82–18.26<0.001*2.490.97–6.410.058
 DM, CVD98 (16.3)43 (19.3)2.491.62–3.82<0.001*1.641.05–2.550.029*
 DM, CVD, RSD10 (1.7)2 (0.9)1.260.31–5.240.7470.570.14–2.370.440
 Other22 (3.7)15 (6.7)2.551.41–4.620.002*1.590.87–2.890.130
ABO group
 A258 (43.0)93 (41.7)ref.ref.
 B108 (18.0)45 (20.2)1.220.85–1.740.285
 AB55 (9.2)14 (6.3)0.900.51–1.580.713
 O179 (29.8)71 (31.8)1.190.88–1.630.264
Rh-positive537 (89.5)200 (89.7)ref.ref.
Rh-negative63 (10.5)23 (10.3)1.170.76–1.800.479
ICU admission
 No425 (70.8)ref.ref.
 Yes175 (29.2)223 (100.0)46.6512.13–179.42<0.001*
Intubated
 No576 (96.0)9 (4.0)ref.ref.
 Yes24 (4.0)214 (96.0)34.3617.57–67.21<0.001*22.8411.37–45.86<0.001*
Follow-up period, days9 (6–13)12 (6–19)
WBC, ×103/µL7.55 (5.9–10.2)13.25 (9.9–19.2)1.061.05–1.08<0.001*
NEU, ×103/µL5.2 (3.7–8)12 (8–17.9)1.071.06–1.08<0.001*1.021.01–1.040.020*
LY, ×103/µL1.3 (0.8–1.8)0.4 (0.2–0.8)0.290.21–0.38<0.001*

Numerical variables without normal distribution are given as median (IQR 25th–75th percentiles). Categorical variables are given as n (%). The asterisks show statistical significance. CVD, cardiovascular disease; RSD, respiratory system diseases; DM, diabetes mellitus; ICU, intensive care unit; WBC, white blood cell; NEU, neutrophil; LY, lymphocyte; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; ref. reference.

Discussion

In our study, compared with the blood group distribution of healthy blood donors in the region, the prevalence of COVID-19 was higher in blood groups A, B, and AB and lower in blood group O. Our results are in agreement with other studies suggesting that blood group O individuals are somewhat more resistant to clinically overt infection with SARS-CoV-2 than other blood groups [16, 17, 18, 19, 25]. Dzik et al. [26] have stated that the fact that the blood donors were selected particularly from among those with blood group O could be a reason why blood group O was detected less often in the patient group. This is a very reasonable interpretation. However, blood group A was more common than blood group O in the blood group distribution of our donors, even though this was not statistically significant. Nevertheless, blood donors cannot accurately reflect the actual blood type in this area. There are both healthy people and patients in the blood group population that represents the whole society. In addition to the higher O blood group in the donor population, the male gender is also higher. The population mobility of the region may also change the distribution of blood groups over time. Therefore, blood group distribution should be done by screening the whole society and should be up to date. Individuals infected with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 should also be identified by screening the whole population. Blood group studies done in this way will give us the most accurate result. Good organization, a long time, a serious workload, and high costs are required to perform this work. It is therefore an ideal but difficult way of working. In the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic, it was shown that anti-A antibodies in individuals with blood group O prevented the invasion of the S protein into the tissues [14], and it has been claimed that, due to the same mechanism, this will cause less infection in individuals with blood group O in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic [19, 25]. Although there are anti-A antibodies in blood group B, there are no published studies that show that blood group B is less susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. This situation was explained by Gérard et al. [27], with the anti-A antibodies in blood group O being the IgG type and the anti-A antibodies in blood group B being the IgM type. The importance of the anti-A antibody titre in SARS-CoV-1 infection has also been emphasized [14]. However, no increase in susceptibility to COVID-19 infection was detected in individuals with blood group AB without any blood group antibodies. In this case, the increased susceptibility of blood group A to infection and lower susceptibility of blood group O to infection must involve other mechanisms. One of these may be that thromboembolic diseases are more common in blood group A, which therefore shows more disease symptoms [28]. In fact, knowing the blood group distribution of SARS-CoV-2-infected asymptomatic cases in the community would help elucidate the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and the blood group of infected individuals more objectively. However, no such study has yet been published. There is a symbiotic relationship between blood group expression and maturation of the gastrointestinal microbiome. Bacteria can induce antibodies against blood group antigens, including ABO. Blood group antibodies are stimulated by the intestinal flora, and blood group antibody titres are lower in hyper-hygienic populations and those following Western diets [8, 29, 30]. Guillon et al. [14] showed that SARS-CoV-1 can be blocked with monoclonal anti-A and human anti-A antibodies; this can be accomplished using a high anti-A antibody titre but a lower anti-A antibody titre is ineffective. This finding may indicate that SARS-CoV-2 infection will spread faster in industrialized countries with people who follow Western diets and live in extremely hygienic conditions. Our results are in agreement with other studies suggesting that blood group O individuals are somewhat more resistant to clinically overt infection with SARS-CoV-2 than others. However, this tendency is not sufficiently established to allow special prophylaxis recommendations for non-O individuals. Of course, blood group is not the only factor that determines contagiousness. For instance, all South American Indians have the O blood type [31]. However, there is no information that the frequency of COVID-19 is lower or the rate of spread is slower in areas where South American natives live. There are many factors, other than blood groups, that determine the contagiousness and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Many of these are still unexplained. More comprehensive studies are needed to explain the relationship of SARS-CoV-2 infection and blood groups.

Limitations of the Study

Our study has limitations. The blood group distribution of donors was made 11 years ago. The COVID-19 patients were compared with healthy blood donors. Only hospitalized COVID-19 cases were included in the study.

Statement of Ethics

This study was conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by our institutional ethics commission (EC No. 49/2020).

Funding Sources

There was no specific funding for this study.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author Contributions

D.Y.A. designed the study and collected data. M.B. collected and analyzed the data. Both authors read and approved the final version.
  26 in total

1.  The relationship between ABO blood groups and susceptibility to diarrhea due to Vibrio cholerae 0139.

Authors:  A S Faruque; D Mahalanabis; S S Hoque; M J Albert
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 9.079

2.  Variation in the host ABO blood group may be associated with susceptibility to hepatitis C virus infection.

Authors:  R Behal; R Jain; K K Behal; T N Dhole
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 2.451

3.  ABH and Lewis antigen distributions in blood, saliva and gastric mucosa and H pylori infection in gastric ulcer patients.

Authors:  Luisa Caricio Martins; Tereza Cristina de Oliveira Corvelo; Henrique Takeshi Oti; Rosane do Socorro Pompeu Loiola; Delia Cristina Figueira Aguiar; Katarine Antonia dos Santos Barile; Renata Kelly Costa do Amaral; Hivana Patricia Melo Barbosa; Amanda Alves Fecury; Juciclayton Tavares de Souza
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-02-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  COVID-19 and ABO blood group: another viewpoint.

Authors:  Christiane Gérard; Gianni Maggipinto; Jean-Marc Minon
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 6.998

5.  [Origin of anti-human blood group B agglutinins in white Leghorn chicks].

Authors:  G F SPRINGER; R E HORTON; M FORBES
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  1959-08-01       Impact factor: 14.307

6.  The Higher Frequency of Blood Group B in a Brazilian Population with HIV Infection.

Authors:  Tor Gunnar Hugo Onsten; Sidia Maria Callegari-Jacques; Luciano Zubaran Goldani
Journal:  Open AIDS J       Date:  2013-10-18

7.  Relationship between the ABO Blood Group and the COVID-19 Susceptibility.

Authors:  Jiao Zhao; Yan Yang; Hanping Huang; Dong Li; Dongfeng Gu; Xiangfeng Lu; Zheng Zhang; Lei Liu; Ting Liu; Yukun Liu; Yunjiao He; Bin Sun; Meilan Wei; Guangyu Yang; Xinghuan Wang; Li Zhang; Xiaoyang Zhou; Mingzhao Xing; Peng George Wang
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 9.079

8.  Association between ABO blood groups and COVID-19 infection, severity and demise: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Bing-Bing Wu; Dong-Zhou Gu; Jia-Ning Yu; Jie Yang; Wang-Qin Shen
Journal:  Infect Genet Evol       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 3.342

9.  Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Fei Zhou; Ting Yu; Ronghui Du; Guohui Fan; Ying Liu; Zhibo Liu; Jie Xiang; Yeming Wang; Bin Song; Xiaoying Gu; Lulu Guan; Yuan Wei; Hui Li; Xudong Wu; Jiuyang Xu; Shengjin Tu; Yi Zhang; Hua Chen; Bin Cao
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Association between ABO blood groups and risk of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

Authors:  Juyi Li; Xiufang Wang; Jian Chen; Yi Cai; Aiping Deng; Ming Yang
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 6.998

View more
  5 in total

1.  A Pilot Study on COVID-19 Positive Subjects: An Excerpt of Post-Infection-Pro-Diabetic Disposition & Related Consequences in Correlation to Hepato-Pancreatic Bio-Markers, Pro-Inflammatory Cytokines and Other Risk Factors.

Authors:  Sushil Kumar; Neha Rai; Akash Bansal; Amit Mittal; Nimai Chand Chandra
Journal:  Indian J Clin Biochem       Date:  2022-06-18

2.  Role of ABO Blood Groups in Susceptibility and Severity of COVID-19 in the Georgian Population.

Authors:  Levan Ratiani; Tamar V Sanikidze; George Ormotsadze; Elene Pachkoria; Giga Sordia
Journal:  Indian J Crit Care Med       Date:  2022

3.  ABO Blood Group in Relation to COVID-19 Susceptibility and Clinical Outcomes: A Retrospective Observational Study in the United Arab Emirates.

Authors:  Wael Hafez; Shougyat Ahmed; Nihad Abbas; Kamran Ahmed; Samera Kamran; Arun Arya; Srinivasa Raghu Rao; Mahmoud Abdelshakor; Sara Ali; Honeymol Sebastian; Mishal Tariq; Kumar Lal; Ahmed Abdelrahman
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-29

4.  Probing SARS-CoV-2-positive plasma to identify potential factors correlating with mild COVID-19 in Ghana, West Africa.

Authors:  Kesego Tapela; Fatima O Oyawoye; Charles Ochieng' Olwal; Precious C Opurum; Jones Amo Amponsah; Kekeli Aku Lumor Segbedzi; Becky Tetteh; Frederick Kumi-Ansah; Joe K Mutungi; Evangeline Obodai; Emmanuella Amoako; Seth Agyemang; Nicaise Tuikue Ndam; William Kwabena Ampofo; Julian C Rayner; Gordon A Awandare; Lily Paemka; Yaw Bediako; Peter Kojo Quashie
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2022-10-03       Impact factor: 11.150

5.  Emphasizing the link between blood types in multi-ethnic disparities and COVID-19 infection in Makkah, Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Wesam A Nasif; Abeer S E Ali; Asim A Khogeer; Mohammed H Mukhtar; Mohamed M NourEldein; Ahmed Y Shebly; Shmukh H Alqahtani; Yahya A Alnashri; Ghidaa E Khouj; Ziyad I Gadah; Mohammad A Althubiti
Journal:  Saudi Med J       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 1.422

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.